BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

CR or DS problem??

Expert replies
by Gaurav 2013-fall » Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:08 am
Effects of the past two years' economic recession on City X have included a downturn in the restaurant industry. The local Chamber of Commerce reported a 25 percent decrease in average sales among restaurants during the first year of the recession. During the second year, however, despite a stagnant economy, the average sales returned to within 5 percent of prerecession levels.



Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the change in restaurant sales between the first and second year of the recession?


Some restaurants did not suffer any decrease in sales.

Most of the restaurants in City X whose sales decreased by more than 20 percent went out of business during the first year of the recession.

Some restaurants started offering reduced prices in an effort to stimulate sales during the second year of the recession.

Between the first and second years of the recession, food prices went up in City X.

More residents of City X than average reported staying home for meals during the first year of the recession in an effort to save money.


from PR
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by spartacus1412 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:57 pm
I would go with B
Most of the restaurants in City X whose sales decreased by more than 20 percent went out of business during the first year of the recession.


OPtion A is irrelevant to the question.

option B suggests that most of the restaurants with decreased sales went out of business, hence, effectively decreasing the total number of restaurants.Now if restaurants decrease, and demand remains the same as in the first year of recession then sales in the second year will probably increase.

optionC-this also helps but option B is stronger than Option C

Option D-contrary

Option E- contrary

Thanks,
Hope it helps!:)
Its do or die this time!
Practise, practise and practise.
Join the discussion

by Gaurav 2013-fall » Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:27 pm
OA is B
Join the discussion

by heymayank08 » Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:50 pm
+1 B
Join the discussion

by ice_rush » Sat Apr 28, 2012 8:45 pm
(B) is the clear winner.
Join the discussion

by vikram4689 » Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:33 pm
Some restaurants did not suffer any decrease in sales.
We are concerned about sales of industry and not of selected few

Most of the restaurants in City X whose sales decreased by more than 20 percent went out of business during the first year of the recession.
bingo!, weaker ones went out of business so the one that we pulling down the average are out and hence average sales increased

Some restaurants started offering reduced prices in an effort to stimulate sales during the second year of the recession.
this explains but B is better also see some vs most in C and B resp.

Between the first and second years of the recession, food prices went up in City X.
This should result in reduced sales in both years

More residents of City X than average reported staying home for meals during the first year of the recession in an effort to save money.
this explains why sales were low for 1st year only, but nothing is said about 2nd year
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)
Join the discussion